[HN Gopher] AMD 'Strix Halo' Ryzen AI Max+ Debuts with RDNA 3.5 ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       AMD 'Strix Halo' Ryzen AI Max+ Debuts with RDNA 3.5 Graphics and
       Zen 5 CPU Cores
        
       Author : kcb
       Score  : 70 points
       Date   : 2025-01-06 19:27 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.tomshardware.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.tomshardware.com)
        
       | jsheard wrote:
       | This is the first x86 SoC to follow the lead set by Apple
       | Silicons huge unified memory bus.
       | 
       | Bandwidth is more or less on par with the M4 Pro, and it supports
       | up to 128GB.
        
         | unusualmonkey wrote:
         | Remember that AMD has been making x86 SoC's with unified memory
         | for quite some time.
        
           | jsheard wrote:
           | Yeah but they had pretty meagre memory bandwidth until now,
           | aside from the parts they made exclusively for Xbox and
           | Playstation. AMD didn't seem to be interested in bringing
           | _fast_ unified memory to real computers until Apple did it.
           | Now they need to double up the bus again to make an M4 Max-
           | alike...
        
             | BeefWellington wrote:
             | It's possible they were restricted by agreements with
             | Microsoft or Sony not to release anything before this year.
        
               | hedgehog wrote:
               | Historically PC OEMs cared about price more than graphics
               | performance so that's what they got. If you look at
               | mobile SoCs or the eDRAM-equipped SKUs Intel made for
               | Apple you see more emphasis on memory & graphics
               | performance similar to consoles.
        
               | kmeisthax wrote:
               | Those agreements would be >15 years old at this point, I
               | doubt AMD would agree to sandbag their entire APU lineup
               | going forward just to make the base model PS4 and Xbone
               | look good, and I _especially_ doubt that they would do
               | that _again_ with the PS5 and Xbox Series when they
               | actually had money and room to negotiate. Likewise, it
               | doesn 't make sense as a restriction Microsoft or Sony
               | would impose: the console business is one of convenience,
               | not power. They aren't trying to beat PCs and they don't
               | care if PCs are a better deal. They care if they can get
               | you to buy a box that locks you into their DRM scheme.
               | 
               | Furthermore, during the chip shortages of the last few
               | years, AMD was actually selling broken PS5 silicon for
               | use as a normal Windows PC[0]. If there were restrictions
               | on selling APUs above a certain performance level, then
               | this PC wouldn't exist.
               | 
               | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h08cMFwqRc
        
             | babypuncher wrote:
             | It isn't what the market wanted, and by market I mean OEMs,
             | because I'm sure consumers would have loved it.
             | 
             | The OEMs buying APUs to use in laptops and SFF desktops
             | were more interested in cutting costs than boosting
             | graphics performance. Users who want better 3D performance
             | can buy a higher end laptop with a discrete GPU and juicier
             | profit margin.
        
           | sliken wrote:
           | Right, but none wider than 128 bits, unless you count PS5 and
           | XboxX.
        
         | crest wrote:
         | It "just" doubled the memory bus width from 128 to 256 bit and
         | cranked up the interface clock speed. I wonder what it means
         | for the infinity fabric. Is it going to run at ~4GHz to keep
         | up?
        
       | okasaki wrote:
       | > AMD says this delivers groundbreaking capabilities for thin-
       | and-light laptops
       | 
       | Laptops with 120W cpus aren't thin or light.
        
         | getcrunk wrote:
         | Amd in general has allowed their mobile cpus to power scale. I
         | don't see why this would be any different. 15w on the go. 120
         | with plug
         | 
         | Edit: per article these are positioned from 45w up
        
           | eigenspace wrote:
           | AMDs slides say 45-120W.
        
         | enragedcacti wrote:
         | The quoted tdps seem to be for CPU+GPU combined and these SKUs
         | have huge increases in GPU size (40 CUs up from a max of 16
         | last gen). The M4 Pro and M4 Max fall into the same tdp range.
        
         | crest wrote:
         | That's for both CPU, supposedly no-longer puny iGPU and the
         | NPU. You'll get >=80% real-world throughput for about half the
         | power budget which is can easily be cooled in a 14" laptop
         | that's thin for a gaming laptop without shattering your
         | eardrums. I'll grant that you'll have to pick between
         | acceptable acoustics, thermal throttling, or form factor when
         | you go beyond 60W continuous heat output.
        
           | okasaki wrote:
           | > That's for both CPU, supposedly no-longer puny iGPU and the
           | NPU.
           | 
           | Right, the CPU.
        
         | runjake wrote:
         | FTA (emphasis mine):
         | 
         | "All of the AI Max chips have a 55W base TDP, but also a
         | configurable TDP that ranges from 45 to 120W to unleash more
         | horsepower _in designs that can handle the thermal output_. "
        
       | ncann wrote:
       | > AMD 'Strix Halo' Ryzen AI Max+ 395 PRO
       | 
       | Gosh that name is a mouthful
        
         | leptons wrote:
         | I hate it. Whatever does "strix" even mean?? The rest of it is
         | stupid too.
        
           | nerdix wrote:
           | Isn't Strix Halo just a code name?
        
             | mindcrime wrote:
             | That was my understanding.
        
           | Havoc wrote:
           | >Whatever does "strix" even mean?
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strix_(mythology)#Greek_origin.
           | ..
        
         | hnuser123456 wrote:
         | Strix Halo is the codename, not marketing name, so you can
         | remove that part.
         | 
         | "AI" seems to have replaced the segment number.
         | 
         | The + is because it's the top-end model of the lineup.
         | 
         | Not sure what's Max or Pro about it though.
        
           | ncann wrote:
           | They managed to put Max, plus, and Pro into the name, which
           | is kinda impressive in a way. Now we just need Ultra to
           | complete the set.
        
             | toast0 wrote:
             | AMD Better watch out, Altera, a subsidiary of Intel, claims
             | a trademark on MAX+PLUS.
        
               | shoo wrote:
               | there's still room for MAX(+, +) or MAX(+, PRO)
        
           | enragedcacti wrote:
           | I think the AI appears on any SKU with enough TOPS for
           | copilot+ (they released some 200 SKUs that are just Ryzen
           | 5/7, no AI)
           | 
           | Max is the segment number i.e. it's "Ryzen 11" (the other 300
           | series SKUs they announced are Ryzen AI [5|7] 3xx). Weirdly
           | though there are no Ryzen 9s so maybe it's really just a
           | rebrand of 9.
           | 
           | The Pro just means it has management and security features
           | for enterprise customers.
        
             | hnuser123456 wrote:
             | Thank you. It's nice to be able to decode that.
        
           | Uehreka wrote:
           | Isn't Strix a brand of RAM or something?
        
             | runjake wrote:
             | Strix is a brand name for the ASUS ROG line of PC
             | components, but AMD is using it as a code name.
             | 
             | BTW, here's the meaning of "Strix":
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strix_(mythology)
        
           | timewizard wrote:
           | > Not sure what's Max or Pro about it though.
           | 
           | Secure processor, shadow stacks, secure boot, hardware asset
           | trackability. Enterprise stuff.
        
           | solarkraft wrote:
           | > Strix Halo is the codename, not marketing name, so you can
           | remove that part.
           | 
           | That was the good part, lol.
        
         | gazchop wrote:
         | Sounds like ChatGPT had a breakdown when asked to name it.
        
       | jmward01 wrote:
       | If they can deliver the drives and support for pytorch out of the
       | box then I know what my next laptop will have in it.
        
         | UncleOxidant wrote:
         | Yep. Though I'd prefer just to have a small form factor box on
         | my desk. Something the size of a Mac Mini.
        
       | ksec wrote:
       | I cant find any information on memory it uses for its 256GB/s. It
       | said New Memory interface. Seems high even for 256Bit LPDDR5X.
       | 
       | Zen 5 CPU, RDNA 3.5 GPU, and XDNA 2 NPU. No word on process
       | nodes.
        
         | adrian_b wrote:
         | It uses LPDDR5X-8000, with a 256-bit memory interface (double
         | in comparison with standard desktops).
         | 
         | 8 GHz x 32 bytes = 256 GB/s
         | 
         | This has been known for a long time.
         | 
         | What annoys me is that AMD does not say whether the Zen 5 cores
         | of Strix Halo have full vector processing pipelines, like
         | Granite Ridge and Fire Range, or they have the narrow pipelines
         | of Strix Point and Krackan Point.
        
         | sliken wrote:
         | Various leaks have claimed that some products would ship with
         | DDR5-8533 which is 266GB/sec. I wouldn't be surprised if a
         | range of frequencies ship with the 1st gen devices.
         | 
         | Maybe even a SFF sized motherboard that allows CUDIMMs, which
         | is a nice fit since each CUDIMM is 128 bits wide.
        
       | kcb wrote:
       | AMDs comparison with the M4 Pro.
       | 
       | https://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/3d-...
        
         | diggan wrote:
         | What is the graph supposed to measure, actually? Renders are
         | usually measured in seconds, so high=worse, but then clearly
         | they highlight it as they're better, so it's the second-
         | difference as a percentage or something?
         | 
         | Why can't companies just include absolute numbers in their
         | comparisons...
        
           | zamadatix wrote:
           | It's first party marketing so always orienting the scale
           | towards "higher=better=ours" and measuring via "whatever
           | measurement gave the best numbers to present". They could
           | give all the information in the world and I'd still wait and
           | see what 3rd party reviews say the performance actually is
           | rather than look into the 1st party number.
        
           | tedunangst wrote:
           | They're benchmark scores.
        
           | danudey wrote:
           | Betterness.
        
         | zamadatix wrote:
         | Source article of that (though it's actually linked in TFA as
         | well) https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-mobile-
         | processor...
         | 
         | Non-thumbnail version of the chart:
         | https://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/3d-...
        
         | bearjaws wrote:
         | Not shown: Wattage
         | 
         | 100% chance its chewing through at least 50% more power to
         | achieve the result.
         | 
         | Infact based on their TDP guidance, it goes up to 120w, which
         | is more than double M4. But we don't know what the
         | configuration was for this benchmark. We also don't have great
         | numbers for M4's power consumption either.
         | 
         | Then you throw in the fact 120w TDP from AMD is not actually a
         | power consumption figure... and it's all made up.
        
           | danudey wrote:
           | Not to mention what's the performance like on battery vs.
           | plugged in. If I have to stay tethered to the wall in order
           | to achieve the rated performance then it's not really an
           | apples-to-apples comparison unless you only ever use your
           | laptop at a desk (which is probably most people, honestly).
        
           | ac29 wrote:
           | M4 Max is the most comparable to Strix Halo and while Apple
           | does not appear to give an official power consumption, there
           | are plenty of anecdotal reports of it using over 100W under
           | load. For example:
           | 
           | https://www.reddit.com/r/macbookpro/comments/1hj3m0p/m4_max_.
           | ..
           | 
           | https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/m4-max-eats-
           | battery.244...
        
         | Archit3ch wrote:
         | Shouldn't they compare Max+ to M4 Max?
        
           | dagmx wrote:
           | They should but it's not favourable. In their presentation
           | they specifically said it outperforms the binned M4 Pro and
           | is on par with the unbinned M4 Pro.
           | 
           | It would be behind the M4 Max. It's also over double the
           | wattage of the M4 Pro to achieve these numbers.
        
           | sliken wrote:
           | Even M4 Pro is a big step up. M4 max is pretty expensive and
           | I suspect AMD is targetting a lower price point, not that any
           | prices were mentioned today.
           | 
           | 256 bits * DDR5-8533 is a pretty big step up from any other
           | x86-64 laptop or SFF and should be a pretty huge help for
           | anything graphics or bandwidth intensive, like LLMs.
        
       | Lerc wrote:
       | If it runs pytorch at speed without hand holding I would probably
       | get one.
       | 
       | If it runs tinygrad at speed(a lower bar developmentally) I might
       | get one.
       | 
       | Is there a model benchmarking site where you can select varying
       | degrees of models by source code and see how they perform on
       | different hardware. It would assist people to evaluate whether or
       | not a specific piece of hardware is good for the jobs that they
       | want it to do.
        
         | diggan wrote:
         | > Is there a model benchmarking site where you can select
         | varying degrees of models by source code and see how they
         | perform on different hardware. It would assist people to
         | evaluate whether or not a specific piece of hardware is good
         | for the jobs that they want it to do.
         | 
         | Not that I'm aware of (at least based on real benchmarks), but
         | it's something I've been noodling about building, together with
         | with some other associated data that can be helpful when
         | wanting to select a model. Glad to hear I'm not the only one
         | wanting it :)
        
       | UncleOxidant wrote:
       | > If AMD keeps with tradition, which we fully expect, we will see
       | these monstrous APU chips come to desktop PCs in the future.
       | 
       | How far in the future? I don't need another laptop, but would be
       | nice to have a box to run local llms on. If these things can run
       | LLMs at a decent clip then this would be sort of a "shut up and
       | take my money" situation.
        
         | wmf wrote:
         | HP already announced a mini workstation with this chip.
        
           | UncleOxidant wrote:
           | I'm seeing a laptop [1] do you have a link to the
           | workstation?
           | 
           | EDIT: Oh, I see they're calling the laptop a workstation.
           | 
           | [1] https://liliputing.com/hp-zbook-ultra-14-g1a-mobile-
           | workstat...
        
       | sylware wrote:
       | mmmmh.... I wonder how much the CPU ram usage will slow down the
       | GPU with real life loads.
        
       | sliken wrote:
       | The strix halo announce was pretty much exactly what was leaked.
       | 
       | However one big surprise was that the Halo 395 chip runs Llama
       | 3.1 70B-Q4 2.2x times faster than a RTX 4090 24GB. Anyone have
       | any details? The slide mentions seeing AMD endnote SHO-14 for
       | details.
       | 
       | Maybe 70B-Q4 doesn't fit in 24GB?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-01-06 23:01 UTC)